125K jobs lost in June, unemployment goes to 9.5%

posted at 8:48 am on July 2, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Today’s unemployment report for June was a mixed bag. As expected, the overall number went negative as 225,000 Census Bureau workers lost their temporary jobs. However, a gain of 83,000 private-sector jobs allowed the net loss to come down to 125,000 and the overall unemployment rate to decline slightly to 9.5%. That still failed to meet analysts expectations, however:

Total nonfarm payroll employment declined by 125,000 in June, and the unemployment rate edged down to 9.5 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The decline in payroll employment reflected a decrease (-225,000) in the number of temporary employees working on Census 2010. Private-sector payroll employment edged up by 83,000.

Household Survey Data

Both the number of unemployed persons, at 14.6 million, and the unemployment rate, at 9.5 percent, edged down in June. (See table A-1.)

In June, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) was unchanged at 6.8 million. These individuals made up 45.5 percent of unemployed persons. (See table A-12.)

However, this explains the rate decrease:

The civilian labor force participation rate fell by 0.3 percentage point in June to 64.7 percent. The employment-population ratio, at 58.5 percent, edged down over the month. (See table A-1.) …

In June, about 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, an increase of 415,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 1.2 million discouraged workers in June, up by 414,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.4 million persons marginally attached to the labor force had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

In other words, the topline number declined because we still are seeing a flight from the overall work force. The number of people who have simply stopped looking for work keeps increasing, not decreasing.

Adding 83,000 private-sector jobs is better than the 41,000 added in May, but still not good enough to keep up with population increases. In order to maintain position as young Americans become eligible to join the work force, we have to add 100,000 jobs a month. Anything less means we are falling behind.

Employers cut 125,000 jobs last month, the most since last October, the Labor Department said Friday. The loss was driven by the end of 225,000 temporary census jobs. Businesses added a net total of 83,000 workers, an improvement from May. But that’s also below March and April totals.

The nation has 7.9 million fewer private payroll jobs than it did when the recession began.

Analysts expected private payrolls to rise by about 110,000, according to Thomson Reuters. The report indicates that businesses are still reluctant to hire as the economy slowly recovers form the worst recession since the 1930s.

The unemployment rate fell as 652,000 people gave up on their job searches and left the labor force. People who are no longer looking for work aren’t counted as unemployed.

And when they come back into the workforce, they’ll make that topline number look worse than it otherwise would when job creation eventually begins. But that isn’t going to be any time soon, based on the fitful and weak economic growth we’ve seen so far this year.

And when they come back into the workforce, they’ll make that topline number look worse than it otherwise would when job creation eventually begins. But that isn’t going to be any time soon, based on the fitful and weak economic growth we’ve seen so far this year.

And that’s the one glimmer of “hope” that Obama and the Dems can cling to. That a horrible economy will depress workers so much, it’ll destroy any motivation they may have had to look for a job.

The problem with that is you’re still left with a really bad revenue situation. If people aren’t working, they ain’t paying taxes. And if they ain’t paying taxes, the federal deficits go even higher and states risk bankruptcy.

The unemployment rate fell as 652,000 people gave up on their job searches and left the labor force. People who are no longer looking for work aren’t counted as unemployed.

And, the 9.5% unemployment figure will be touted as good news, proof that the economy is getting stronger and that the government is on the right track in “fixing” and fundamentally changing everything. Blech!

I suppose by now most have seen the absurd video clip that Breitbart posted (featured at Drudge) of Nancy Pelosi claiming that unemployment checks are the fasted way to increase employment. (Alternative universe warning)

Adding 83,000 private-sector jobs is better than the 41,000 added in May, but still not good enough to keep up with population increases. In order to maintain position as young Americans become eligible to join the work force, we have to add 100,000 jobs a month. Anything less means we are falling behind.

..hey, all you college grads who voted for Obama and can’t find a job? Well, the pitchforks and torches are over here. we will be having a big party in November and you’re all invited.

I suppose by now most have seen the absurd video clip that Breitbart posted (featured at Drudge) of Nancy Pelosi claiming that unemployment checks are the fasted way to increase employment. (Alternative universe warning)

I do not expect real improvement until the private sector is secure in believing that we have a government that believes in free market capitalism again. As long as we have a fascist/socialist/marxist/top-down-command-and-control-statist president, there will not be a real recovery.

I suppose by now most have seen the absurd video clip that Breitbart posted (featured at Drudge) of Nancy Pelosi claiming that unemployment checks are the fasted way to increase employment. (Alternative universe warning)

onlineanalyst on July 2, 2010 at 8:57 AM

It seems Nancy’s thought is that when people have money, they spend it on goods and services, thus creating/saving employment.

This only applies to free money from the government Democrats. Lowering taxes to allow people to keep their own money to spend on goods and services doesn’t work the same way…

I was out of work for almost five months. I collected unemployment. I looked for work every day. I was prepared with a well rounded skill set. I have been back to work for six weeks now as a contractor. Yesterday they talked to me about making me permanent.

Real world experience from a responsible American citizen. And I bucked the trend at 59 years old.

If you’re prepared and work hard at it evy day, you can make it through. I didn’t want to take govt money but I did it responsibly and used UI they way it is supposed to be used. As a stop gap. Twice in my life I have had to do this. Worked for me both times. Thenrest of my working career I made sure I worked hard at staying employed.

Hey…you idiots in the press…..private companies (like ours) aren’t hiring because OBAMA IS RUINING OUR ECONOMY! Sorry to yell, but apparently it is just not soaking into your pea brains. I know that this is a hard concept to grasp but more taxation, fees and regulation equals less flowing capital to invest in new jobs.

Botox is taking its toll…she is getting more incoherent each week…amazing how the left just nods their head when these guys speak.
If a conservative tried this stunt, they would be laughed off the public stage.
Huck isn’t nearly this bad, no even close, and he is laughed by most of the conservatives.

Interesting spin by the MSM and liars in the White Hoos that the Census layoffs are driving the bad numbers!

I don’t seem to recall during the March – April time frame when all those census workers were hired the State run media or administration liars reporting that the census part timers were propping up the numbers!

Also interesting that the only employment to show a positive was adult women.

More formerly stay at home women finding jobs because hubby got laid off or had to take a pay cut or part-time work?

Or adult women now resorting to the worlds oldest profession in Pinnochios’ and Bite-Mes’ recovery?

The one idea that we seem to have dropped, happily so — remember the phrase was “shovel-ready”? We were going to create government jobs.

It put me in mind of a great story Milton Friedman used to tell. He went to Asia in the 1960s and was proudly taken by the government to see a public works project. They were building a canal. He was struck everyone was digging the canal with shovels. Friedman says, why no heavy earth-moving equipment?

They said, oh, this is a jobs program. So Friedman says, why don’t you give them spoons instead of shovels? I think we understand, now, the sterility of government trying to create jobs.

Not that this matters in the big pic,but I’d guess more than a few of the discouraged workers have found their way to the off the books economy, as workers and employers try to find work while reducing costs.This would be something only small business could do and get away with.

Not that this matters in the big pic,but I’d guess more than a few of the discouraged workers have found their way to the off the books economy, as workers and employers try to find work while reducing costs.This would be something only small business could do and get away with.

xkaydet65 on July 2, 2010 at 9:55 AM

See thats’ what I said above more adult women joining the worlds oldest profession!

Let me be perfectly clear. Make no mistake. I inherited this mess. I am instituting immediately plans for a permanent annual census to maintain our government employment momentum. These workers will soon be documenting the new Dem.. er, citizens who will soon be appearing on the southern border.

You’re unemployed but because you haven’t looked for work in the past 4 weeks you’re not unemployed. Fundamentally flawed logic. If we could convince these unemployed not unemployed people to look for work for at least 1 minute every 4 weeks then Americans would see the “real” unemployment rate.

Fifteen million Americans out of work, but it’s so gratifying to know Mr. Obama feels our pain. Both Obama and the Democrats know that when the checks stop, they’ll see a part of this republic so angry, the Tea Parties will look like a sit-in from the seventies. Meanwhile, the New York Times thinks Mr. Obama’s speech on immigration reform was just dandy:

President Obama’s first major speech on immigration had the eloquence and clarity we have come to expect when he engages a wrenching national debate. In declaring the welcome of strangers a core American value, in placing immigrants at the center of the nation’s success and future, Mr. Obama’s exhortation was worthy of the late Senator Edward Kennedy, whose memory he respectfully summoned on Thursday. “Anybody can help us write the next great chapter in our history,” he said, regardless of blood or birth.

Can we get an amen, and pass the BS plate?

Since the Times sees no reason to mention that historically, this nation welcomed almost all immigrants with open arms and legal documentation, we should just bury our heads to the respect for laws that have kept this country “civilized”. Sending eleven million more into the dole of government dependency is just what Obama and the liberal socialist democrats are promoting. Eleven million more registered democrats relying on government entitlements and a current welfare system that will guarantee “Mexican-Americans” remain second class citizens and generational servitude to their masters in Washington. Further, the unions will see this as their own private voting block and they’ll create a lower pay scale, calling it “entry-level” as a promise to the American dream. We’re headed to the welfare mentality of the Carter era, where prosperity was defined by a government check, (at the working taxpayer’s expense), and a block of voters who will have no choice but to support their “handlers”. As unemployment remains high, the American worker will also become dependent upon the government’s “assistance”…..until the presses in Washington stop printing and the well runs dry. Of course, Obama, along with the Times will blame this all on Bush—the time honored excuse for poor leadership.

You’re unemployed but because you haven’t looked for work in the past 4 weeks you’re not unemployed. Fundamentally flawed logic. If we could convince these unemployed not unemployed people to look for work for at least 1 minute every 4 weeks then Americans would see the “real” unemployment rate.

Sigh.

chemman on July 2, 2010 at 10:14 AM

Just as the CBO “cooked the books” during the health care debate, the government is giving the public these fabricated numbers. If they published the “real numbers” the markets would tank and the delusional liberal left would see the man behind the curtain.

Okay. Explain it to me. How can jobless claims increase, job creation in the private sector stay flat statistically, and unemployment go down? I understand the number of those who quit looking for a job was nearly 3/4 of a million people, and that the public sector jobs are not very high; thus, there needs to be a dramatic increase in jobs somewhere for unemployment to actually decrease.

Does anyone else think that these numbers have been cooked? These numbers have been “revised” in the past to reflect the reality of the jobs market. We’ve seen that in several quarterly reports. These numbers announced today just can’t reflect reality.

Is anybody there? Does anybody care? Does anybody see what I see?1776 (the musical)

The employment situation is worse than you realize. One thing we saw last month, when the number of employed individuals increased thanks to Census hiring, is that the majority of that hiring activity was concentrated in the 20-24 age bracket (as you might expect with the Census’ focus on hiring college students.)

Outside of that age bracket, there was a net overall decline in employment levels. Both teens (Age 16-19) and older workers (Age 25+) saw their total employed numbers fall.

Digging into the numbers for this month, we see that the Age 20-24 group’s employment level fell, as we might expect from the Census layoffs, as the majority of these jobs added in May were temporary.

We also see a mild worsening for older age groups in the new jobs report, but the real news is that the employment situation for teens dramatically worsened. Prior to the June jobs report, teen employment levels had been either flat or improving since January.

That’s significant because teen employment trends tend to lead the trend for the entire U.S. workforce by about a year, thanks to teens representing the most marginal members of the U.S. workforce (compared to older workers, teens are less educated, experienced and skilled – they are the age group most able to withdraw or be withdrawn from the U.S. workforce.)

With no increase in the minimum wage scheduled to occur in the future, the loss of teen jobs now is a direct result of a worsening economic outlook for the businesses that hire teens. Using teen employment as a year-ahead leading indicator, that would put the U.S. economy into contraction mode in the latter half of 2011.

It’s not surprising people stopped looking. One can now get 99 weeks unemployment. I’d stop looking for work too if I knew I had 2 years of govt checks coming.

angryed on July 2, 2010 at 8:52 AM

They’ve been getting 2 years of unemployment for 2 years now, and in June the further extension was voted down ending I believe it was 500k people’s benefits. So why did they leave the job market exactly?

Anyways, I’m tired of explaining how the unemployment rate is calculated in every one one of these threads (not just on hotair but other conservative sites). Maybe I’ll just write it up in Word and then copy & paste it or something.

There was a bill passed early this year that will take care of that ratio.

Electrongod on July 2, 2010 at 9:19 AM

What bill was that exactly? If you mean Obamacare then I suspect you don’t understand what the B/D adjustment is.

You’re unemployed but because you haven’t looked for work in the past 4 weeks you’re not unemployed. Fundamentally flawed logic.
chemman on July 2, 2010 at 10:14 AM

They could certainly do it better but the general idea is if you aren’t looking for work you’re not in the labor market. If you’re not why should you be in most cases? I know we talk about the 3 million or so marginally attached or discouraged workers, but taken to the extreme and counting everyone not looking for work as unemployed we’d have soemthing like an extra 60 million unemployed people (and around a 33% unemployment rate).

The line between who those in the 63 million are looking for work and who isn’t has to be drawn somewhere. I do think it should be have you looked for work in the last 3 or 6 months instead of the last month.

B/D Ratio (Birth/Death) added 147,000 jobs – keeping the negative numbers from being far worse than they really are

U-6 = 16.5%

LordMaximus on July 2, 2010 at 9:12 AM

So right. 147,000 phantom jobs created this month by the birth/death model. Since February 2010, 728,000 phantom jobs created.

That exceeds Obama’s assertion of 600,000 jobs created this year meaning we’ve actually had job losses to the tune of 128,000. For this month, strip out the fake b/d jobs and you have a negative 64,000 created.

I miss Ms. Red, and I’m hopeful she is one of the fortunate 83,000 but more likely she is one of the several hundred thousand that are now officially ignored in the unemployment count. Our Orwellian government has created a new classification: the unworker.

Who in the world are these people who “quit looking for work”?
Were they the unemployed, who conceded that they’ll never find a job finally resorted to living off their stashes of cash?

Or, are these the people who ran out of unemployment and can no longer request benefits?

I’m going with the latter, which is very dreary and frightening.

betsyz on July 2, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Your second theory has nothing to do with discouraged workers except as an explanation for your first theory. Unless you mean… I need that Star Trek double *facepalm* pic used around here (along with the ability to post pics of course).